Iraq inquiry: Alastair Campbell sets himself up for a fall

Alastair Campbell has been facing a lot of questions about the infamous WMD dossier at the Iraq Inquiry today. In particular, the inquiry team have zeroed in on Tony Blair's claim that British intelligence showed "beyond doubt" that Saddam was a grave and growing threat.

(The claim in full is here: "What I believe the assessed intelligence has established beyond doubt is that Saddam hascontinued to produce chemical and biological weapons, that he continues in his effortsto develop nuclear weapons, and that he has been able to extend the range of his ballistic missile programme.")

Sir John Chilcot, the inquiry chairman and no stranger to Whitehall's ways, put it to Mr Campbell that the basic intelligence reports would not have been so stark. “Assessed intelligence never establishes anything beyond doubt,” he said.

Mr Campbell replied by claiming that Sir John Scarlett, then the chair of the Joint Intelligence Committee and later the head of MI6, had told him that the intelligence was indeed categorical.

He said: “I have been in meetings with John Scarlett and intelligence officials and is that what they were saying? Yes it is.”

Somehow, I can't imagine this is going to rest here. Sir John Chilcot is right: no spook worth his salt ever puts things in black and white; they speak and write in shades of grey.

Will Sir John Scarlett follow the Campbell line and admit that yes, he did indeed break every principle of his profession and tell Mr Blair and Mr Campbell that the Iraqi intelligence was "beyond doubt." If he does, his professional reputation will be severely damaged.

Alternatively, he can, when the opportunity presents itself, tell the inquiry that he disputes Mr Campbell's version of events. If he does that, the Chilcot team will have to decide if they believe Tony Blair's former spin doctor or the former head of MI6.

(Alex Barker at the FT points out that Sir John Scarlett has already distanced himself from the foreword to the dossier, telling the inquiry it was an essentially political text and nothing to do with him.)